Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be shocked 90% of Down's babies are aborted?

575 replies

Strictly · 14/01/2011 09:20

I was jut reading this sorry, yes it's from the DM!

and then did a little Googling and it turns out 91% of people told their baby has DS will have an abortion... Shock

I'm just astounded it's so high. I'm not making a judgment on the idea people might abort, but am very shocked that it seems almost universal to abort if told the baby has Down's.

I wonder what it is about that particular condition that 91% of people feel they could not live with? The rates for abortions of Cerebral Palsy babies for example is nowhere near as high. Is it just that Down's is easy to detect so the majority of people actually get the chance to decide?

OP posts:
Original poster
Strictly · 17/01/2011 17:37

mrsdevere I was really interested in your recent post about the dismorphic features of DS meaning people are more likely to abort.

I agree that I think people do fear being stared at, or their child being stared at. With other conditions you can 'hide' it a lot of the time if you so wish, so you can go to the supermarket etc without people giving you a second glance. However DS is something that could never be hidden, due to the features, so I think a lot of people find that a lot harder to cope with.

OP posts:
thefirstMrsDeVere · 17/01/2011 17:54

strictly there is also that abiding image of seeing badly dressed adults with DS trailing around the shops with their elderly parents. This may not be an image familiar to subsqent generations but I do think its a factor for many people over the age of 30ish.

I know quite a few children who dont look 'very Downs' if you excuse the expression. But it is usually an instantly recognisable condition and one of those that peveryone thinks they know about IYSWIM.

midori1999 · 17/01/2011 17:57

I think you're spot on there mrsdevere.

I was 27 when I had my DS. That suprises a lot of people but it's not uncommon.

thefirstMrsDeVere · 17/01/2011 17:58

Sorry pressed to soon,

To be a bit clearer - I dont like to think it is a deciding factor in a parent's choice to abort. I think it is more subtle than that. I really wouldnt want to accuse a parent of aborting just because their child looks 'Downs'.

Its more of a societal factor. Arrggghhh there was me trying to be more clear and have ended up confusing myself.

thefirstMrsDeVere · 17/01/2011 18:01

Most of the children I work with with Downs Syndrome are born to young parents midori I suppose because they are not always offered testing?

I read somewhere that your chance of having a baby with Downs Syndrome is increased if you are under 18 as well as over 35.

wannaBe · 17/01/2011 18:01

but it's often the invisibility of other disabilities that makes people's' reactions to them worse.

I have a friend whose ds is severely autistic. At his age it should be plainly obvious to anyone that his behavior is not nt, and yet she still gets stares and tuts from people saying that he should know better at his age etc. It's the invisible disabilities that people remain ignorant of..

midori1999 · 17/01/2011 18:05

They used to say it was because more young women had babies in general that more babies with DS were born to younger Mums. Not sure if that is still the case, it seems a lot more women are waiting longer to have children now.

AFAIK, everyone is offered screening regardless of age. I had it in all of my first three pregnancies without giving it any real thought or knowing much about it if I am honest. I have declined it since DS3 was born.

thefirstMrsDeVere · 17/01/2011 18:07

Yes that is true wannabe but I think its a different issue.

People will expect and even accept certain behaviours from a person with Downs because they are obviously disabled. This can also mean low expectations so has its down side.

My son has ASD and looks 'normal' so I know what you mean about the tuts and stares.

I think its a bit like the way our society views good looking people v those who are deemed to be ugly. Or even the way disabled children are 'cute' but disabled adults are a bit disgusting.

You can probably tell I am not quite ready to write a thesis on this just yet Grin

Original poster
Strictly · 17/01/2011 18:21

I do know what you mean about the parents mrsdevere. This weekend I saw 2 children with DS with their Mothers, both of whom were already 50+ with 10-13 year old children. They looked exhausted. I think that tends to the perception tbh, rather than sprightly young things like midori!

OP posts:
2shoes · 17/01/2011 18:40

2Strictly Mon 17-Jan-11 17:37:44
mrsdevere I was really interested in your recent post about the dismorphic features of DS meaning people are more likely to abort.

I agree that I think people do fear being stared at, or their child being stared at. With other conditions you can 'hide' it a lot of the time if you so wish, so you can go to the supermarket etc without people giving you a second glance. However DS is something that could never be hidden, due to the features, so I think a lot of people find that a lot harder to cope with.2

no you can't
how ever hard I try I cannot disguise dd's wheelchair. so we have the constant staring form ignorant people.

Original poster
Strictly · 17/01/2011 18:44

I didn't mean all other conditions can be hidden 2shoes.

I meant that, perhaps people told their baby has DS will abort because they don't want the stares whereas they might not if the baby was disabled, but it couln't be seen ie: the heart condition which is a major problem for nearly all DS babies.

OP posts:
2shoes · 17/01/2011 18:46

I know what you mean, but I still have problems getting my head round the fact that would be a good reason to abort.
because people stare.

CoteDAzur · 17/01/2011 18:59

I would think that the main reason people don't want a baby with DS is the 50-60 IQ, rather than "people will stare".

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 17/01/2011 19:14

What a hideous statement, CoteDAzur.

Original poster
Strictly · 17/01/2011 19:23

I don't think people have abortions just because of the stares, no. However, I do think it may be a contributing factor. If you fear you're child could never fit in and will always draw the looks of strangers you may question if you could cope with that.

OP posts:
Original poster
Strictly · 17/01/2011 19:24

silly ipad, your not you're.

OP posts:
CoteDAzur · 17/01/2011 19:31

Why "hideous statement"? It is an observation. I'm pretty sure that it is a correct one, too.

Eliza70 · 17/01/2011 19:36

I don't think it is the stares or the IQ that lead people to abort a child with DS, I think it is the fear of the unknown and that a child with special needs is not part of the 'dream' of being a parent.

OldMumsy · 17/01/2011 19:40

I had twins so the tests were pointless. I am saddened to see so many heartless condemnations of people who have made difficult decisions about ending pregnancies due to problems with the baby. I am glad I never had to do this and luckily the twins were fine. I am also shocked that some people think that CP can be tested for in pregnancy, it usually occurs at birth and is down to oxygen deprivation to the brain.

Bunbaker · 17/01/2011 19:43

I don't think anyone has any right to judge unless they have "walked in those shoes"

My daughter had medical needs until she was three and a half. I knew that if I got pregnant again I definitely did not want another child with medical issues.

OH and I are older parents with no family nearby, so if I had had a child with lifelong medical issues there would have been the added worry of who would look after it when we were too old to manage.

crazycatlady · 17/01/2011 19:47

I see my post got lost amongst the arguing...

I raised the question over the true prognosis that the parents are getting before making the decision to terminate. For example, in our case, the medical forms say 'Downs Syndrome' so our baby counts as one of that 90%, but actually there were so many complications as a result of the DS that our baby had no chance of survival whatsoever. It was this that drove our decision. DS and an otherwise 'healthy' baby would not have led us down the same tragic path.

How many of that 90% recorded as pregnancies terminated because of Down Syndrome were actually terminations based on extremely poor prognosis? I have no idea, but I have a strong suspicion this debate could look very different if we knew.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 17/01/2011 20:26

To me it is an offensive observation.

I have nothing more to say to you.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 17/01/2011 20:27

(that was to CoteDAzur)

Eliza70 · 17/01/2011 20:36

But Bunbaker people who choose to terminate have not "walked in those shoes", in the most part they have not had a child with special needs, but are making assumptions on what they think it would be like and all of those assumptions are negative ones.

crazycatlady · 17/01/2011 20:41

How do you know they are making assumptions Eliza? How do you know that the decision they make is not purely on the basis of a very very poor outlook for their baby?

Equally, we may not have a disabled child already (we have one non-disabled DC) but we certainly did as much research and talked to as many people (professionals and non) as we could before making our decision.

I can't believe many people make the decision lightly based on 'assumptions'.